Abstract
Entrepreneurship is a mobility mechanism for the immigrant generation, but second-generation Asian Americans are often assumed to shun business ownership in favor of entering the professional labor market. However, there is reason to believe that entrepreneurship is a common and important mobility pathway for the second generation. We explore this possibility by investigating second-generation Chinese Americans who bet on business. Using fieldwork and in-depth structured interviews conducted with second-generation Chinese American entrepreneurs, we ask: Why do highly educated Chinese Americans choose business over the professional labor force? How do family wealth, transnational connections, gender, ethnicity, and education shape their entrepreneurial pathways and experiences? We explore the choices and constraints that result in three ideal types of entrepreneurial experiences represented in our data: family business inheritors, family-funded entrepreneurs, and self-made business owners. Our examination of Chinese American business owners reveals a complex interplay between individual agency, intergenerational dynamics, structural advantages or disadvantages, and strategic adaptation. Ultimately, we find that second-generation Chinese Americans chart a range of business pathways and outcomes shaped by their class, ethnicity, and gender.
In less than half a century, the United States has seen a remarkable increase in its Asian American population due to changes in immigration law that expanded entry opportunities for non-European immigrants. In 1965, when Asians comprised less than 1 percent of the US population, the landmark Immigration and Nationality Act eliminated restrictive and racist national origin quotas that banned Asian immigrants from entering the US by creating two legal entry pathways, high skill and family reunification, that have eased the entry of Chinese immigrants into the economic and educational structures of the United States (Kasinitz et al. 2009; Xie and Goyette 2012, Zhou 2009; Lee and Zhou 2015). Today, Asian Americans comprise 7 percent of the US population, and Chinese Americans—including immigrants from Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan—are the largest Asian subgroup at 24 percent (Ruiz et al. 2023). As the Chinese American population has grown, researchers have documented that just over half of first-generation Chinese immigrants are highly educated (52 percent have at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to 35 percent of US-born adults) and upwardly mobile on most measures of income and wealth following migration (Keister et al. 2016; Lee and Zhou 2015; Rosenbloom and Batalova 2023). There is also clear evidence that second-generation Chinese Americans have high levels of educational and occupational attainment (Jiménez and Horowitz 2013; Tran et al. 2019). As a result, both scholars and the popular press portray Chinese immigrants as well-established, with children—the second generation—who are likely to follow the same path (Lee and Zhou 2015).
Members of the Chinese immigrant generation have high rates of entrepreneurship (Abelmann and Lie 1995; Park 2005), and business ownership is an important reason that the first generation has adapted economically and has been critical to the development of diasporic communities (Zhou and Liu 2017). Although entrepreneurship is viewed as a mobility mechanism for the first generation, Chinese and Korean immigrants generally push their children into the white-collar labor market due, in part, to their perception that business is low-status and labor-intensive (Sanchirico 1991). Indeed, much has been made in the scholarly literature and media of the Chinese-American second-generation’s integration into higher education and high-status occupations, a result, in part, of the immigrant generation’s hyper-selectivity on education and income (Feliciano 2006; Lee and Zhou 2015; Tran et al. 2018). However, the exceptional outcomes of the Chinese-American generation are not an artifact of hyper-selectivity alone. Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou (2014, 45) demonstrate that Chinese immigrant parents and their children adhere to a “success frame,” shaped by ethnic networks and structures in the community, that support a mobility strategy of working in one of four professions: a doctor, lawyer, pharmacist, or engineer. Ultimately, research on the Chinese American second generation examines their educational aspirations, performance, and success frames (Louie 2004; Kao and Tienda 1995; Lee and Zhou 2014, 2015; Zhou and Lee 2017), racial-ethnic identities (Kibria 2000; Casarez et al. 2022), transnational cultural activities (Louie 2006), and continuing racialization (Lee and Sheng 2024; Lee and Kye 2016; Lee et al. 2024). Research thus documents how members of each generation fare both economically and socially, but the entrepreneurial pathways and experiences of Chinese Americans in the US attract little attention from researchers. To our knowledge, there are no studies of second-generation Chinese American entrepreneurs. Yet, there is reason to believe that entrepreneurship is an important mobility pathway and indicative of strategic adaptation for the second generation. We explore this possibility by investigating second-generation Chinese Americans who bet on business.
Using fieldwork and in-depth structured interviews conducted with second-generation Chinese Americans, we ask two questions: What motivates highly educated Chinese Americans to forego the success frame for self-employment? What choices and constraints prompt Chinese Americans to bet on business over the professional labor force? We find that second-generation Chinese Americans chart three ideal types of entrepreneurial experiences: family business inheritors, family-funded entrepreneurs, and self-made business owners. These pathways are shaped by choices and constraints. The ability to pursue one of these entrepreneurial pathways, especially the first two, is buttressed by family wealth as well as ethnic capital that allows the second generation to seize opportunities. However, we show that the choice to bet on business is also made under constraints, such as familial pressure to carry on the family business, or concerns about labor-market discrimination, the latter of which points to a pattern of strategic adaptation. Ultimately, decisions to forego the success frame and choose entrepreneurship are shaped by agency, intergenerational dynamics revolving around family obligations, perceptions of discrimination or uncertainty in the labor market, as well as the class and structural advantages that propel entrepreneurship on the one hand, and the structural disadvantages that make is necessary on the other.
IMMIGRANT BUSINESS OWNERSHIP AND THE SECOND GENERATION
Most research on ethnic enterprise, including among Chinese Americans, investigates the immigrant generation. Early studies concentrate on the experiences and outcomes of Asian immigrants emphasizing the structural constraints that lead Asian immigrants to adopt self-employment as a survival strategy, often operating labor-intensive niche businesses in low-value markets in ethnic enclaves (Zhou 1992) or in niches as middlemen minorities (Bonacich 1973; Lee 2002). More recently, scholars have explored transnational Chinese entrepreneurs (Zhou and Liu 2015, 2017), Chinese immigrant tech entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley (Saxenian 2002) and millionaire migrants from China (Ley 2010). These studies challenge the presumption that immigrant entrepreneurship is primarily a last-resort economic adaptation. Regardless, business ownership is a calculated intergenerational mobility strategy for immigrants, especially those with high levels of human capital from China and Korea, who often face blocked opportunities in wage and salary employment resulting from discrimination and language barriers that prevent them from transferring their credentials to the receiving society (Raijman and Tienda 2000; Kim 2007; Zhou 2009). However, research suggests that Chinese immigrants do not want their American-born children to bet on business; instead, they advance a success frame that revolves around a specific mobility strategy (Lee and Zhou 2014, 2015). Chinese immigrants view academic achievement and the attainment of high-status, stable, and less labor-intensive professional jobs outside the ethnic economy as the primary avenue for socioeconomic mobility and success (Abelmann and Lie 1995, 129; Zhou 2009; Lee and Zhou 2015), a preference with which their children purportedly agree (Steinberg et al. 1992; Zhou 2009; Lee and Zhou 2014, 2015).
A small strand of research examines the Chinese and Korean second generation’s relationship to business via the lens of labor-intensive family businesses such as ethnic restaurants and retail. In a study of Chinese immigrant take-away businesses in Great Britain, Miri Song (1997) finds that the second generation prefers wage work to the long hours and risk involved in running a take-away restaurant, in part because they have first-hand experience laboring in the family business as children. In a study of Korean-owned businesses, Dae Young Kim (2006) finds that the majority of the second generation do not enter business, but that the family business can serve as an alternative mobility path, and even a mobility trap, that is distinct from the professional route. Overall, the immigrant generation has a higher rate of self-employment than their US-born counterparts (Goldscheider and Kobrin 1980; Light and Gold 2000; Min 2008) and, among immigrant business owners, succession of low-value businesses in ethnic enclaves is not a priority, as business ownership is viewed only as a means to support their children’s integration into the professional labor force (Wong et al. 1992).
However, given the US postindustrial economy, the marketization of China, and globalization, we expect that some Chinese immigrant parents build lucrative businesses that may be perceived as viable and desirable by the second generation. Thus, some Chinese Americans might succeed their parents in the family business rather than enter the professional labor market, expanding success frame theories and challenging the idea that entrepreneurship is a last-resort strategy to overcome labor market exclusion.
OTHER DETERMINANTS OF SECOND-GENERATION BUSINESS OWNERSHIP
What other factors might lead the second generation to bet on business? Ethnic, structural, or class factors, and their intersection, are dynamics that push American-born minoritized people into entrepreneurship (Smith and Beasley 2011). Native-born minoritized groups may view entrepreneurship as the epitome of the American dream and as a pathway to autonomy in a society that values individualism and meritocratic ideals (Valdez 2011). Highly educated second-generation Latinos turn to self-employment because they experience discrimination and blocked opportunities in professional jobs and because they believe that the skills, networks, and financial capital obtained in professional occupations can be used to capitalize on the growing Latino population via “ethnoracial capitalism” (Agius Vallejo and Canizales 2016, 2023). Chinese Americans have high levels of education and occupational attainment on average and are lauded by some as attaining “honorary White status,” but Asian Americans continue to experience exclusion in society and racialization as model minorities and as forever foreign (Tuan 1999; Kim 2007; Lee and Kye 2016; Lee et al. 2024). In this vein, Pawan Dhingra (2012) finds that some native-born South Asian Americans turn to motel ownership—a niche in which South Asian immigrants concentrate—because they also perceive blocked opportunities in professional jobs. Some second-generation Chinese Americans may follow a similar path as some native-born Latino and Asian Indian entrepreneurs, where they pursue business ownership as a pathway to autonomy, or because they experience a “bamboo ceiling” in the professional labor market as they attempt to move up into managerial and executive positions, indicative of a pattern of strategic adaptation to perceived discrimination in the labor market (Lee and Zhou 2015; Lee et al. 2024; Kim and Zhao 2014; Sakamoto et al. 2009; Xie and Goyette 2003). Investigating the dynamics of the bamboo ceiling for Chinese Americans, Jackson G. Lu (2024) finds that lower perceived creativity made Chinese Americans less likely to be nominated and elected as leaders in study groups, even after controlling for characteristics like English proficiency and the motivation to serve as a leader. In another study, Lu (2022) finds that East Asians’ networks are characterized by high levels of ethnic homophily compared to other groups, limiting their advancement in multiethnic institutions.
The model that has dominated the research on ethnic entrepreneurship is the ethnic solidarity thesis, which emphasizes cultural traits and ethnic resources as the central factors that foster and sustain ethnic enterprise in enclave economies, the latter of which is an identifiable ethnic community with immigrants engaged in a range of business activities who have access to coethnic clientele, a supply of ethnic labor, and access to ethnic resources that may include credit and information (Portes 1987; Portes and Shafer 2007). This thesis locates entrepreneurship at the meso-level, thereby rendering entrepreneurial action as an outcome of features that are unique to a particular ethnic group (Romero and Valdez 2016). Asian immigrants are portrayed as drawing on ethnic resources, such as group trust and bounded solidarity, financial and social reciprocity exchanges, and coethnic embeddedness in business niches and entrepreneurial ethnic enclaves, and transnational connections, to facilitate enterprise (Portes and Bach 1985, Portes and Zhou 1992; Portes and Sensenbrenner 1993; Light and Bonacich 1988; Raijman and Tienda 2000).
The ethnic solidarity thesis has been questioned for privileging ethnic resources above structural factors that enable business entry and success (Valdez 2011; Romero and Valdez 2016). Critics of the ethnic solidarity perspective propose an interactive—or mixed embeddedness—approach that incorporates macro- and meso-structures of opportunity. This perspective emphasizes that structural and contextual factors, such as the local opportunity structure, the nature of markets, policy, technology, and informal and legal regulations, can hinder or facilitate immigrant enterprise (Waldinger et al. 1990; Kloosterman and Rath 2003; Valdez 2011). Ultimately, little is known about whether and to what extent the Chinese second generation engages in business in ethnic economies and whether ethnic resources are central to their trajectories and enterprises. If Chinese Americans have attained honorary White status because of their economic integration, business owners may be less likely to rely on ethnicity and ethnic resources and may target the general market. Alternatively, ethnicity may serve as a resource for the second generation, who may engage in ethnoracial capitalism because they perceive that business opportunities stemming from ethnicity or race might be had in the market (Agius Vallejo and Canizales 2023), due to Chinese immigrant replenishment in the US or transnational connections given China’s dominance in the global market.
Because the ethnic solidarity thesis has dominated the literature, scholars have only recently cast a spotlight on class resources, especially wealth, for facilitating minority business entry and success. Among the most critical mechanisms enabling minority enterprise is adequate access to financial capital that can be used to start and maintain a business (Fairlie and Robb 2008). This advantage is related to an individual’s race and class position and their access to financial institutions, family, and coethnics that can be utilized for capital as well as personal wealth. Wealth is vital as it can be invested directly into the business or used as collateral to obtain loans, thereby hastening entry into small business ownership (Bates 1997; Keister 2000, 2005; Agius Vallejo and Canizales 2016; Agius Vallejo and Keister 2020; Agius Vallejo and Vasquez-Tokos 2024).
Economic development in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, combined with US immigrant entry policies that prioritize immigrants with high-skill and education, means that some Chinese immigrants may arrive with financial capital or retain ties to family in the home country from whom capital can be obtained (Ley 2010; Zhou and Liu 2015; Zhou and Lee 2017). Indeed, recent research demonstrates that Chinese immigrants have extraordinarily high levels of wealth compared to native-born Americans, Latino immigrants, and all other Asian immigrant groups save for Indian immigrants, and that wealth increases with tenure in the US (Keister et al. 2016). The significance of wealth as a determinant of entrepreneurship among the Asian American second generation is unknown, but we expect that some second-generation Chinese Americans may be able to draw on their class position, especially parental or familial wealth, to fund their business ventures.
DATA AND METHODS
This research relies on twenty-seven in-depth interviews conducted with Chinese American entrepreneurs. Three of the respondents are 1.5 generation, meaning they were born in China but migrated in childhood to the US, and twenty-four are US-born. The sample is diverse in terms of wealth, age, gender, and class. Respondents were sampled using snowball sampling. To assess the degree to which entrepreneurship contributes to wealth accumulation for immigrants and their descendants, all respondents filled out a face sheet where they supplied detailed data on their assets and wealth. Respondents received fifty dollars for participation. The interviews lasted between one and a half and two hours and usually occurred in a public place or the respondents’ home or office. The interviews were conducted by two Chinese American research assistants. Detailed field notes and memos were recorded after the interviews. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and are contained within Dedoose, a secure qualitative analysis program that provides a methodical way to retrieve and analyze data, draw connections between interview respondents, and identify patterns.
All of the respondents hold at least a bachelor’s degree, two respondents have a master’s degree, two have JD degrees, and one has a PhD. The majority of respondents reported that they were raised middle or upper class, with two respondents categorizing their class background as working class. We did not purposefully select respondents with college degrees. It was challenging to interview women business owners—only three of our respondents are women. Self-reported net worth ranges from a few hundred thousand dollars to over ten million dollars. Net worth is drawn from businesses and real estate assets. Over 90 percent of the sample have assets in stocks, bonds, or mutual funds.
The Los Angeles metropolitan region (encompassing the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura) is an ideal site for the study of Chinese American entrepreneurs. We selected the Los Angeles region because it has the highest concentration of Chinese immigrants (Greene and Batalova 2025), is the most entrepreneurial region in the US, and is home to more minority-owned businesses than any county in the nation (Fairlie 2012). Second, Los Angeles is a preferred destination for high net worth and highly skilled immigrants, a pattern driven in large part by the waves of wealthy and middle-class legal immigrants from the global Chinese diaspora who have settled in the region (Lee and Zhou 2015; Zhou 2009). Accompanying the high-skilled diaspora are resource-poor Chinese primarily from mainland China. Chinese immigrants with higher socioeconomic status are bypassing traditional Chinatown in favor of suburban ethnoburbs, which serve as hubs of social capital and transnational commerce (Li 1998; Zhou 2009). Areas of dense transnational linkages between Los Angeles and China are reflected by high-tech firms started by Chinese scientists and engineers who rely on resource-rich networks in the US and abroad to finance their businesses, as well as entrepreneurs involved in international trade who rely on business experience and networks in Asia (Zhou and Tseng 2001). Together, these characteristics allow us the opportunity to understand how class, wealth, transnational linkages, and ethnic capital are related to entrepreneurship. While Los Angeles is its own unique region, we expect that studies conducted in traditional destinations for Chinese Americans, like New York or the San Francisco Bay Area, may yield similar findings.
As data collection progressed and we continued to interview participants, we constantly referred to the field notes to ground the codes and hypotheses in the data (Glaser and Strauss 1967). In sum, we collected data from a variety of sources—in-depth structured interviews, observation, and participant observation—to guard against selective perception and interpretation (McCall and Simmons 1969). The use of multiple methods allows for comparison and continual evaluation of the relevance of the data (Emerson 2001).
RESULTS
How prevalent is entrepreneurship among second-generation Chinese Americans? Our analysis of the 2024 Current Population Survey shows that 13 percent of Chinese immigrants are self-employed compared with 10.5 percent of the US population. Notably, 10 percent of second-generation Chinese Americans are also self-employed—an unexpected finding given dominant narrow success frame narratives. This pattern of second-generation self-employment extends to other Asian American groups: 13 percent of Vietnamese immigrants and 9 percent of the second generation, and 23 percent of Korean immigrants and 19 percent of the second generation, are self-employed. Also surprising is the fact that Chinese American entrepreneurs are highly educated: 61 percent of 1.5-generation and 91 percent of second-generation Chinese Americans who are entrepreneurs hold at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to just 26 percent of the first generation. Together, these findings challenge prevailing theories that entrepreneurship is not viewed as a viable route for success or that it is merely a last resort mobility strategy for those with low levels of education. Instead, entrepreneurship could be a strategic adaptation choice, especially among highly educated Chinese Americans.
We find that second-generation Chinese Americans chart three ideal types of entrepreneurial experiences: family business inheritors, family-funded entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurial dreamers who claim to be “self-made” (see table 1). Family business inheritors are typically the first, or only son, and they are either “devoted” or “resentful” heirs who succeed their parents in lucrative family businesses. Family-funded entrepreneurs have access to high levels of human capital and family wealth and aim to attain the American dream via business ownership. Entrepreneurial dreamers have lower levels of financial capital and start small domestic businesses related to their ethnic origins or the gig economy and often view themselves as self-made entrepreneurs. We now turn to a discussion of what motivates highly educated Chinese Americans to forego the success frame to bet on these three business pathways, and the choices and constraints that shape them.
Ideal Types of Second-Generation Chinese American Entrepreneurship
Business Inheritors: Devoted and Resentful Heirs
Scholars have long maintained that most Chinese family firms are short-lived, rarely extending beyond one generation, because of the second-generation’s high levels of educational attainment, which increases their opportunities in the mainstream labor market (Wong et al. 1992). Asian immigrant business owners also prefer that their children enter high-status and high-paying jobs in the professional labor market rather than take over the family business. This line of research generally concentrates on those who own small businesses in ethnic enclaves that are labor intensive and have low profit margins, such as ethnic restaurants or small stores. We find that some Chinese immigrants also own large and lucrative businesses that defy the mom-and-pop immigrant entrepreneur stereotype. These immigrants are generally highly educated individuals who entered the US on student visas as admits to graduate programs or on work visas as recruits in top US companies.
The immigrant parents of our second-generation sample have owned their businesses for longer than two decades on average, though a few started enterprises in the last decade. These businesses emerged from an interactive process of structural opportunities in the US immigration system that prioritize high-skill immigrants, ethnic resources, including transnational connections, and structural changes in global markets that have created avenues for transnational entrepreneurship. They were initially modest ventures funded with personal savings or small loans from relatives who lived in the US or the sending country. These companies “blew up,” as one of our respondents put it, as a result of broader changes in domestic and global markets, such as deindustrialization in the US and the opening of China’s manufacturing sector. With annual sales ranging from $2 million to $24 million, these firms are typically transnational and tied to the economic marketization of China or Taiwan, often relying on familial and fictive kin networks in China and Taiwan to manufacture or import goods in demand in the US, such as promotional products, toys, vitamins, and clothing.
Only a small proportion of the parents who started these businesses have stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, and the majority of their nonbusiness assets were either liquid (that is, monetary assets) or held in real estate. As befitting the class and educational background of the parental generation, the second generation have all attained at least a bachelor’s degree from universities ranked in the top 50 nationally, with the majority graduating from campuses in the University of California system. In direct opposition to the success frame, Chinese immigrant parents who own lucrative businesses expect that one of their offspring—preferably a son—will take over the family business. This gendered expectation is not unique to Chinese immigrants as research on family succession shows that even when daughters work in the family business, sons are more likely to be chosen as successors (Ip and Jacobs 2006), but it is in line with the structure of Chinese diasporic enterprises in countries beyond the US that are generally patriarchal in nature (Zhou 2021). Of the ten business heirs in our sample, only two companies are run by women, and both are from families where they are the oldest child. Sons are generally elevated to director of operations positions whereas daughters are often relegated to hidden positions as accountants as parents slowly phase into retirement. The latter pattern is in line with studies of Chinese legacy businesses in other countries, which revolve around the family, institute a son in the top hierarchal position, and where women manage the financial side of the business (Zhou 1992, 2021).
The second generation in family legacy businesses generally do not receive exorbitant salaries—the median annual salary is $80,000. However, wealthy parents often provide their children with additional compensation that entices them to work in the business and that also builds their wealth portfolios. Parents buy their adult children homes in affluent areas of Los Angeles, such as San Marino (an exclusive suburb in the San Gabriel Valley that attracts wealthy Chinese immigrants), they pay for their luxury cars, and they also pay all of their educational expenses. This means that business heirs graduate with little or no educational debt, placing them on a more secure financial footing as they begin their adult lives. As a result, the median net worth of the business heirs in our sample is $3 million.
Heirs chart several pathways into the family business. First, in a pattern mirroring white-owned family businesses (Longenecker and Schoen 1978), parents may engage a socialization strategy, where offspring typically work in the family business as children and during college and assume leadership soon after degree attainment. The intention is that the second-generation will eventually inherit the business as parents slowly phase out. Second, some graduate college and work in white-collar occupations before deciding to join the business. Finally, some heirs intentionally delay their entry into the family business by “sowing their wild oats” in their own entrepreneurial ventures or by obtaining advanced degrees. Typically, business heirs are placed in charge of daily operations as parents transition out. Importantly, parents of this generation generally expect that the second-generation will draw on their human capital skills, social networks, and “American generational resources” (Estrada 2013)—English language fluency, social media savvy, knowledge of American institutions—to act as agents of cultural innovation (Foner and Dreby 2011) where they combine aspects of their parents’ culture with American culture to advance the business.
Regardless of the path, heirs make individual calculations about the short- and long-term rewards attached to working in professional jobs versus taking over the family business that are shaped and buttressed by family wealth. For example, some, along with their parents, view working in lucrative established family businesses as having greater economic rewards compared with white-collar jobs, especially among those who graduated college during or after the Great Recession. Some parents and adult children view the family business as a “fallback” or “safety net” when adult children seemingly underperform in education and the labor market. At the same time, these choices are also made under constraints shaped by intergenerational dynamics and familial expectations of duty, obligation, and debt adult children feel that they owe to their immigrant parents. Some relayed that they took over the firm because of a strong sense of filial duty and parental pressure despite wanting to pursue other careers. We distinguish between two types of heirs: they are either devoted or resentful.
Devoted heirs were eager to succeed their parents in part because they perceive economic returns from the established family business to be greater than what they would receive in the labor market, a rationale that became more salient during and after the recession. After graduating from a top-ten university with a degree in architecture in 2006, Gary landed an entry-level position at an architecture firm. He earned a six-figure salary, but when the Great Recession coincided with his impending marriage, he worried about his future and economic stability, especially as the real estate market crashed. He always knew that he would one day take over the family business manufacturing and distributing auto parts and the recession was the opportune time to do it. As he explained, “I was in New York, and then the whole recession thing, and I was also getting married at the time. So I thought, ‘Hey, it’s a good break to start over in a way. Hey, let’s give it a try, see what happens.’ And here we are five years later.” Gary’s risk paid off. His family’s business weathered the recession, and while he makes a relatively small annual salary of $100,000 given his company’s yearly sales of $24 million, he has amassed $10 million in stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, and he owns two properties with an estimated combined value of $750,000.
Richard also bet on the family business after a short stint in a professional position. After receiving his master’s degree at a prestigious private university in a health-related field, Richard worked as a research associate at a University of California health sciences lab with the initial goal of applying to doctoral programs. However, Richard’s father constantly asked him to take a leadership role in the family business with the expectation that Richard would soon take over the business. The deal was sealed when he was promised a $90,000 starting salary and significant long-term returns, which was far more attractive than several more years as a student followed by a job search on the competitive academic job market.
A:I just, I realized I did not want to pursue any more academic training.
Q:How come?
A:I didn’t wanna be broke for another five years. No offense. And then my father’s business was starting to take off, really take off. And then there was no one that he could fully trust to take over the daily operations. So I kinda felt like there’s an obligation for me to go back. At the same time, I’m presented with a better opportunity too.
Q:Why did you feel obligated?
A:It’s just Asian children’s sense of duty to family.
Parental wealth and the family business can also buffer against relatively low earnings potential for the second generation. In a pattern echoing research on second-generation Korean Americans who view the family business as a safety net, other devoted heirs fall back on the family business if they land jobs that their parents deem to be too low-status with low economic returns—as was the case with one respondent who was unable to find a high-paying job after graduating amid the recession. Others fall back after having sowed their wild oats with other entrepreneurial ventures. Robert exemplifies this pattern. Robert’s parents were born in Shanghai, on mainland China, but moved to Taiwan during the Cultural Revolution, where they completed college. Upon arriving in the US, Robert’s parents worked in the warehouse of a local packaging company and eventually parlayed the skills they gained into a similar business of their own, where they now net over ten million dollars a year. The packaging business is contained within a large office building with an attached warehouse and has since expanded beyond the original business. Robert’s parents own two-thirds of a factory in China, where their products are manufactured. An impressive waiting room in the front office is filled with family photos of Robert’s family with Chinese dignitaries, including the president of Taiwan. Cubicles, filled by sales staff speaking Mandarin and English, line the front room. Robert grew up in Southern California and developed a passion for import cars and, funded by his parents, he built street racing cars while in high school and college. He became well known on the national import car scene and started a magazine and other related ventures under the moniker “Chopstick Productions.” When the enterprises failed to turn substantial profits, and as he entered his thirties, Robert made the choice to fall back on his family’s lucrative manufacturing business, but also relayed that “it was the right thing to do” because it was time for him to give in to his parents’ expectations. His parents were ecstatic, as they wanted to phase out, and elevated him to the top of the organizational chain—above his older sister who had worked there for more than twenty years, and who was the backbone of the family business.
Resentful heirs often feel guilt tripped into their positions by parents who have worked extremely hard to build a successful business and now want to retire, which demonstrates the constraints under which choosing to take over a family business is made. Resentful heirs dream of pursuing careers in the professional fields and delay their entry into the family business as long as possible. When they do assume a leadership position out of duty, they harbor deep feelings of resentment that they cannot pursue their passions. At twenty-eight years old, Scott’s experience is a case in point. Scott’s heart was set on pursuing a career as a lawyer or professor. However, his parents and sisters had other plans for him. As the only son, Scott’s parents expected him to carry on their successful toy manufacturing and distribution business. His sisters also work in the family business, but in positions behind the scenes, and they pressured Scott to fulfill his duty to take over. Against his parents’ wishes, and only because one sister intervened on his behalf, Scott pursued a graduate degree in international relations, in part because he knew it would provide skills and networks that would help their transnational business, but also because it was an attempt to stall and buy time before taking over the reins. As he relayed:
Well, they weren’t so supportive of me going to grad school. My sisters just kind of convinced them. You know, “You have Scott. Just let him get it out of his system. And what’s the harm in some extra schooling?” And you know, I really wanted to be a professor. I wanted to be a lawyer. Because I just—I have no passion for toys. Like, you know, my dad yelled at me. He was like, “Well, you think I have a passion for selling toys? No, I wanted to be a journalist. I was supposed to be a news anchor, but no. Now I’m doing this. I chose this.” Because you know, like when you’re little, like your parents will give you a lot of choices, or maybe you don’t have any choice at all. So then it just seemed, you know, I was like a second generation. I wanted to choose for myself. And then you know, obviously he chose, he claims he chose to do this, so now he’s doing it, that’s his choice. Not necessarily my choice, but anyways. I ended up going to grad school, international management, because I figured I’d buy time. I think at that point I more or less was resigned, or accepted the fact that I would be in the family business.
Scott’s path illustrates how familial obligations can bind, constraining one’s choices. Having been born and raised in the US with American ideologies, Scott relayed that he feels “culturally distant” from the “Chinese people” who work in the factory in China. Scott also wanted to “follow his passion” and choose his own career path but eventually relented because he felt a sense of filial obligation to his parents and was also pressured by his sisters. Similarly, Sienna, who runs her parents’ architecture firm after graduating with a degree in architecture, as was expected of her, dreams of one day working in the entertainment industry as a screenwriter.
All of the heirs describe feeling indebted to their parents who have made the ultimate “immigrant sacrifice” of coming to the US in the name of their children’s education and mobility. But, resentful heirs give up their own ambitions and experience an intergenerational bind where they feel like they must let go of their individual desires to maintain the business that families rely on.
Ultimately, family wealth, gender, economic factors, and intergenerational dynamics shape the choices and constraints of highly educated Chinese Americans who succeed their parents in the family business. Because most members of the second generation today are still relatively young, little has been written about relations with their immigrant parents as they move through the life course (Kasinitz et al. 2009). These findings make a useful contribution to immigrant integration literature as they demonstrate that, despite high levels of economic incorporation among the American born, the larger family unit continues to shape decision-making and the economic integration of the Chinese second generation well after they transition into adulthood.
Making It Big: Family-Funded Entrepreneurs
The second ideal type describing the entrepreneurial pathways of the Chinese second generation is family-funded entrepreneurs, who have the resources to pursue start-up businesses shortly after college. These Chinese Americans tend to come from affluent backgrounds where they have access to trust funds or have wealthy parents who are willing to invest in their often risky first-time business ventures. Some of the parents of this group are business owners themselves—from transnational manufacturers to professionals with their own successful firms. In contrast to business heirs, however, some immigrant parents may not have businesses to bequeath to their children. Instead, immigrant parents with enough wealth resources often provide the financial capital for their children’s new business ventures, which broadens their children’s entrepreneurial choices. This group typically enters entrepreneurship during or straight out of college and may have a track record of small, failed ventures. Parents may support their children’s desire unconditionally or on a conditional basis after they have proven themselves through degree attainment or other measures of success, such as running a small business.
When they start their businesses, family-funded entrepreneurs benefit from direct financial support or hidden resources, or both, that pave the pathway to business. For example, some receive direct financial support in terms of seed funding and hidden support, like office space. The steady stream of parental financial support allows some in the second generation to weather the start-up phase and reach a stage of fiscal sustainability in business. Immigrant parents sometimes choose to become a coinvestor in their children’s business ventures if they see potential for future growth. This tends to be the case for second-generation Chinese Americans who are launching large-scale start-ups who need multiple rounds of funding resources.
Twenty-six-year-old Charlie exemplifies the first pattern. Charlie was born in Los Angeles but moved to Mexico along with his family as a child, where his parents operate a multi-million-dollar sneaker manufacturing enterprise. Having been born in the United States allowed Charlie to benefit from the perks of “flexible citizenship” (Ong 1999)—having the power and position to choose multiple citizenships to advance economically and socially. After having attended international school in Mexico, Charlie was able to use his US citizenship to go to college in the United States while living in his parents’ home in San Gabriel, California. Charlie attended the University of California, choosing to study economics to “groom himself” to take over the family business. However, Charlie changed his plans after attending university in the US and aimed to make his own name separate from the family business, a choice that was buttressed by his parents’ wealth, allowing him to take an entrepreneurial gamble.
Charlie’s entrepreneurial trajectory began with a costly project that failed before he was able to create a sustainable business. Charlie’s desires to start his own company separate from his father’s pushed him to take an opportunity in Taiwan with his uncle in a bakery start-up. The bakery was based in Taipei and started out with four initial locations. Charlie states that his father did not encourage him but that he viewed his uncle’s offer to partner as an opportunity to “start doing something” and gain business experience. For Charlie’s bakery start-up, his father invested $100,000 in the business. Charlie also withdrew $100,000 from his million-dollar trust fund. However, Charlie’s time in Taipei lasted less than one year because the business was starting to show signs of flopping, including the closure of two of the four branches, and because he said he did not like Taiwan. He remarks: “I guess all my friends were in Mexico and the US. I don’t know, the food … it was good at first but then after a while it’s, I couldn’t get used to it anymore. I just didn’t see a growth potential where the bakery could be like a big hit, like an international hit, so I just decided to back away from it and just do something else.”
While Charlie stayed on board as an investor, he folded his work in Taiwan and returned home. Upon returning, Charlie was able to reconnect with two of his Taiwanese American friends from college who had capital and were interested in starting up an import-export trading company. However, they were missing a marketable sales product. Charlie realized that he could rely on his experience and connections built from his family’s business by attending trade shows in China with his partners. Growing up, Charlie remembers attending trade shows in Asia with his father, accompanying him on business trips. His father had told him that it would be a great place to start looking for a trending sales item. Charlie relayed, “It was just me and one business partner at first. We just decided to work together, we didn’t know what we wanted to do. So I guess our parents suggested to us to go to Asia and try to source some products, so we decided to do that. We went to several trade shows in China … and we saw the vitamin C shower head, that was our first product. We were like, ‘Oh, let’s get into it.’ So that’s how we started.”
Charlie and his friends decided to invest in vitamin C showerheads as their main staple product “mostly because the product was unique.” With three business partners, Charlie did not have to front as much money as the bakery start-up with each partner contributing around $50,000 into a seed fund of $155,000. For his current business, Charlie pulled out another $40,000 from his trust fund and obtained $10,000 from his parents. After starting the business, Charlie’s company’s annual sales have reached $200,000 as one of the few companies that specializes in vitamin C showerheads in the country. Charlie now plans to expand his business into other types of bathroom fixtures. Charlie’s choice to follow an entrepreneurial pathway was shaped by his parents’ wealth and the leveraging of ethnic capital to seize transnational business opportunities.
Twenty-eight-year-old Nick demonstrates how parent financial capital, social capital, and educational networks meld to shape the choice to pursue business. After graduating top of his class in high school, Nick enrolled in biochemical engineering at an Ivy League college. Although he initially considered a career in medicine like his father, Nick decided against it in college because seeing his father in the profession showed him that this career path did not measure up to his standards for success (Lee and Zhou 2015). “I’ll be kind of blunt—so I realized that I could make a lot more money not being a doctor [laughter] and actually being on the business side of it, of medicine.” At the same time, Nick also did not want to work for a large company because he did not want to do the same thing “day in and day out.” As he explained, “I definitely knew I wasn’t going to go to work for a large company managing one product for ten years.”
Although Nick knew that his end goal was some kind of start-up, during college he and two of his colleagues started a tutoring business out of his dorm. Netting $150,000 per year, Nick’s tutoring company lasted throughout college and grew to being bicoastal. The business was based out of his college dorm room, where Nick and his partners recruited tutors with Ivy League degrees online or at school and managed and brokered their tutoring with their clients in both regions. At one point, they had thirty to thirty-five tutors on contract. After graduating, the partners decided to fold the business. Nick did not want to go work for a big firm, and he decided to start his own company, taking consulting jobs on the side to invest in his medical device business, a feat made possible by the hidden financial support he received from his parents, who paid his living expenses in full. Eventually, Nick met his business partners—a beta systems engineer and a neurosurgeon—through his Ivy League college network. A medical device start-up is extremely costly, with traditional medical device start-ups taking about $10 million to $15 million to get to the market. Nick and his collaborators decided to start with $4 million. After the founders put in their own round of personal funding of $10,000 each (totaling $30,000), they started the next round of funding, often referred to as FFF (friends, families, and fools). “So you go to your parents, your cousins, your rich uncle and you go, ‘I want to start this company we can put in like $50,000,’ stuff like that.” During the second round of investment, Nick’s family gave him $100,000, all while continuing to support his living expenses.
Respondents in our sample who follow this pathway of entrepreneurship directly out of college receive, on average, a $100,000 financial investment from their parents. Parental support also goes beyond providing a capital infusion or paying for living expenses. For example, one respondent’s parents used their wealth to purchase an office building so that he could have the space to run his business. Thus, parental wealth—in the form of investment capital or other resources or as a safety net—can make the choice to take a risk on business possible and easier.
Because of their frame of reference, which is highly educated parents with high levels of wealth, the risk of entrepreneurship is sometimes viewed as the way to move beyond the status of one’s parents, who have integrated into the highest echelons of the labor market or who own successful businesses themselves. And these young entrepreneurs are right. Among individuals in the US who have achieved extraordinary economic success, the self-employed are disproportionately represented (Keister 2014; Keister et al. 2021). For those who exemplify this ideal type of Chinese American entrepreneurship, class, familial wealth, and ethnic capital are pivotal to shaping their business choices.
Self-Made Entrepreneurs
The third ideal type of second-generation Chinese American entrepreneurship that emerged from our data are those who view themselves as “self-made” entrepreneurs. In contrast to business heirs or trust-fund entrepreneurs, those who claim to be self-made start different kinds of businesses depending on their pathways into entrepreneurship. First, they may be second-generation Chinese Americans who have left professional jobs to bet on business, exemplifying a form of strategic adaptation to perceived discrimination in the labor market (Lee et al. 2024; Xie and Goyette 2003). Respondents relay that they experienced a “bamboo ceiling” in professional jobs due to racial discrimination, or they perceive that they will if they were to work in corporate America. This finding is consistent with research demonstrating that while second-generation Asian Americans have attained high levels of occupational attainment, they are subject to a bamboo ceiling that prevents them from attaining high-level and lucrative corporate executive positions (Chin 2020; Huang 2021; Lu 2022, 2024; Tran et al. 2019; Lee and Zhou 2015). Self-made entrepreneurs who leave professional careers to bet on business aspire to make “big money” and they lament that their choices may be constrained because they cannot draw on parental wealth to fund their businesses. Some even saw access to familial businesses as a form of privilege that the self-made did not have. However, although this group claims to be self-made and unable to tap into parental wealth to fund their business ventures, a closer look shows the operation of hidden wealth at work that allows them to activate entrepreneurship as a form of strategic adaptation. For example, most of the parents of these Chinese Americans have college degrees, and many have advanced graduate degrees. While their parents did not have the ability to fund their business ventures, nearly all graduated without college debt, as their parents were able to fund expensive college degrees. Some of these respondents have started now lucrative import-export businesses, typically relying on ethnic capital and using personal savings to fund their ventures. Others have built professional services businesses as lawyers or business consultants after working in large firms. Other have built tech companies, funded by venture capitalists, enabled by networks forged in college.
The majority of the second-generation Chinese Americans in our sample hail from upper-middle to upper-class backgrounds, and their class position and family wealth shapes their entrepreneurial pathways. But, three of our respondents were raised in working-class or lower-middle-class families with parents who have low levels of wealth. These respondents have all attained college degrees but had dreams of entrepreneurship and self-funded their businesses. All rely on coethnics for clientele. One respondent, Peter, owns a café that sells boba drinks, a business that he started with credit cards. Another, Donna, a famed pianist, has a lucrative business providing piano and music theory lessons and college admissions services to wealthy coethnics, although she is adamant that she is very disconnected from her ancestral roots and not connected to the ethnic community. The third person, Earl, is a computer consultant who received training in computer science from a trade school after graduating from college. At age thirty-nine, Earl lives with his parents, and he claims on his website to be a multimillionaire, but he reported his net worth at less than a million dollars, attributed, in part, to the home he will inherit.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Entrepreneurship is considered a mobility mechanism for the immigrant generation, but scholars often assume that second-generation Asian Americans—especially children of the highly educated who attain college degrees themselves—exhibit a strict success frame in which they shun business ownership in favor of entering the professional labor market (Abelmann and Lie 1995; Park 2005; Lee and Zhou 2014) and that Chinese parents steer their children into specific professions to buffer them from discrimination (Lee and Zhou 2015). However, we complicate theories of minority business ownership and integration by demonstrating that second-generation Chinese Americans do bet on business, often at their parents’ urging or with their assistance, expanding conceptions of the Asian American success frame and contradicting prevailing theories that entrepreneurship is typically a last resort strategy. Our examination of Chinese American business owners reveals three ideal types of entrepreneurial pathways: family business inheritors, family-funded entrepreneurs, and self-made business owners, which are shaped by choices and constraints that lead some to forego the success frame in favor of business. Family business inheritors are typically the first or only son, and they are either devoted or resentful heirs who succeed their parents in lucrative family businesses. These businesses, often transnational in scope, emerged from an interactive process of ethnic resources and structural changes in global markets. They were initially modest ventures funded with personal savings or small loans from relatives who lived in the US or China. These companies “blew up” as a result of broader changes in domestic and global markets, such as deindustrialization in the US and the opening of China’s manufacturing sector. Resentful heirs are those who view the family business as a fallback or safety net when they are perceived as underperforming in higher education and the labor market. The decision to take over the family business also illuminates the constraints that some in the second-generation experience, as this choice is made in the context of the family unit, and they are influenced by the duty, obligation, and debt adult children feel that they owe to their immigrant parents.
Second, some second-generation Chinese Americans are family-funded entrepreneurs and start their own companies to attain the American dream. These respondents have access to family wealth, and sometimes trust funds, that support their entrepreneurial risks. Some of these individuals have worked in the professional world for several years before starting their own business ventures. A number of those who have left professional jobs have complained about the inability to earn enough income at their professional job and wanting to “make big money,” alluding to the bamboo ceiling Asian Americans experience in mainstream corporate sectors. In addition, because of their frame of reference, which is highly educated parents with high levels of wealth, the risk of entrepreneurship is viewed as a way to move beyond the economic status of one’s parents, especially in a discriminatory labor market. Finally, some second-generation Chinese Americans are self-made, operating smaller-scale sole proprietorships or professional services companies. These entrepreneurs are less likely to rely on familial wealth and often strategically adapt to perceived discrimination in the labor market via entrepreneurship.
The ability to choose one of these three entrepreneurial types is buttressed by class and family wealth, ethnic capital, transnational connections, and high levels of educational attainment. However, these choices are also made under constraints. Familial obligations can bind one to business ownership, and experienced or perceived discrimination, as well as perceptions of success when measured against highly educated parents, also influence the choice to pursue entrepreneurship. Our research thus reveals a complex interplay between individual agency, intergenerational dynamics, and class and structural advantages or disadvantages in shaping entrepreneurial pathways. We also demonstrate the significance of familial and intergenerational wealth transfers as a determinant of the three ideal types of entrepreneurial pathways, demonstrating the centrality of familial wealth to second-generation Chinese American entrepreneurship and, more broadly, an accelerated pattern of adaptation (see Keister et al. 2016).
The Chinese second generation is engaged in businesses that characterize both the primary and secondary sectors of the economy, ventures that rely on ethnic connections and are tied to global markets, as well as the gig economy. The class position of families is vital to understanding the choices of second-generation Chinese American entrepreneurs. Access to family wealth, especially from transnational family-owned businesses, allows some Chinese Americans to accumulate extraordinarily high levels of wealth that chart a path into business ownership. Ethnic resources and transnational connections also serve as a resource for the second generation, who can seize opportunities and capitalize on China’s increasing dominance in the global market or the growth of the Asian American population.
As we show, other second-generation Asian national origin groups perceived as adhering to a strict success frame have surprisingly high levels of entrepreneurship. The ideal types that emerged from our data might be relevant in helping to explain these unexplored outcomes, helping to further expand our understanding of minority entrepreneurship. Future research should continue investigating the entrepreneurial ventures of the second generation across racial groups and by gender, and how entrepreneurial pathways and experiences are shaped by wealth—a familial-level variable that we demonstrate has significant impacts on entrepreneurship and the reproduction of racial inequalities. The mechanisms facilitating wealth-building for second-generation business ownership, particularly access to family wealth, cannot be mobilized by a broad range of immigrant, ethnic, or minoritized groups. The entrepreneurial experience of Black Americans (Gold 2016), and second-generation Latinos from low-status groups (Agius Vallejo et al. 2016; Valdez 2011), differ significantly because of class position and experiences of racial inequality.
This research has implications for studies of immigrant integration. For too long, scholars have focused on the exceptional educational and white-collar career outcomes of second-generation East Asian groups, arguing that entrepreneurship, especially ethnic entrepreneurship, is a viable mobility option for the first generation, but not the second generation, who favor employment in the white-collar labor market. We demonstrate that second-generation Chinese Americans do not always shun entrepreneurship and that business ownership can be a pathway of strategic integration, thereby expanding our knowledge of integration pathways and experiences of second-generation adaptation. In direct opposition to existing research, we show that entrepreneurship that relies on ethnic capital continues to serve as a springboard for mobility and adaptation for the second gen, especially when it revolves around ethnoracial capitalism. Our findings also challenge the narrative that minority entrepreneurship is a mobility strategy adopted only out of desperation. These findings also make a useful contribution to immigrant integration literature as they demonstrate that, despite high levels of economic incorporation among the American-born, the class and ethnic resources and expectations of the larger family unit, along with structural constraints, continue to shape the decision-making of the Chinese second generation well after they transition into adulthood. This process highlights new mobility pathways beyond the white-collar labor market for the Asian American second generation.
- © 2026 Russell Sage Foundation. Agius Vallejo, Jody, and Lisa A. Keister. 2026. “Betting on Business: How Family Wealth and Ethnic Capital Shape Choices and Constraints for Chinese Americans’ Entrepreneurial Pathways.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 12(3): 192–210. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2026.12.3.09. The authors acknowledge a grant from the National Science Foundation (SES-1322738) that supported this research. We thank Carolyn Choi and Rachelle Wang for research assistance and Eden Pan and Justin Scoggins at USC Equity Research Institute for assistance with data analysis. We also thank the issue editors, Jennifer Lee, Kimberly Goyette, Xi Song, Jackson Lu, and Yu Xie as well as Suzanne Nichols, for helpful comments and suggestions. Direct correspondence to: Jody Agius Vallejo, at vallejoj@usc.edu, 851 Downey Way, Hazel & Stanley Hall 314, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1059, United States.
Open Access Policy: RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences is an open access journal. This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
REFERENCES
- ↵Abelmann, Nancy, and John Lie. 1995. Blue Dreams: Korean Americans and the 1992 L.A. Riots. Harvard University Press.
- ↵Agius Vallejo, Jody, and Stephanie L. Canizales. 2016. “Latino/a Professionals as Entrepreneurs: How Race, Class, and Gender Shape Entrepreneurial Incorporation.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(9): 1637–56.
- ↵Agius Vallejo, Jody, and Stephanie L. Canizales. 2023. “Ethnoracial Capitalism and the Limits of Ethnic Solidarity.” Social Problems 70(4): 961–80.
- ↵Agius Vallejo, Jody, and Lisa A. Keister. 2020. “Immigrants and Wealth Attainment: Migration, Inequality, and Integration.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 46(18): 3745–61.
- ↵Agius Vallejo, Jody, and Jessica Vasquez-Tokos. 2024. “The Latino Middle Class.” Annual Review of Sociology 50: 521–46.
- ↵Bates, Timothy. 1997. “Financing Small Business Creation: The Case of Chinese and Korean Immigrant Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Business Venturing 12(2): 109–24.
- ↵Bonacich, Edna. 1973. “A Theory of Middleman Minorities.” American Sociological Review 38(5): 583–94.
- ↵Casarez, Raul S., Allan Farrell, Jenifer L. Bratter, Xiaorui Zhang, and Sharon Kaur Mehta. 2022. “Becoming Asian (American)? Inter-Ethnic Differences in Racial, Ethnic, and American Identities for Asian American Adults.” Ethnicities 22(3): 347–73
- ↵Chin, Margaret M. 2020. Stuck: Why Asian Americans Don’t Reach the Top of the Corporate Ladder. NYU Press.
- ↵Dhingra, Pawan. 2012. Life Behind the Lobby: Indian American Motel Owners and the American Dream. Stanford University Press.
- ↵Emerson, Robert M. 2001. Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations, 2nd ed. Waveland Press.
- ↵Estrada, Emir. 2013. “Changing Household Dynamics: Children’s American Generational Resources in Street Vending Markets.” Childhood 20(1): 51–65.
- ↵Fairlie, Robert W. 2012. “Immigrant Entrepreneurs and Small Business Owners, and Their Access to Financial Capital.” Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy. May. https://advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Immigrant-Entrepreneurs-Financial-Capital-Full-Report.pdf.
- ↵Fairlie, Robert W., and Alicia M. Robb. 2008. Race and Entrepreneurial Success: Black-, Asian-, and White-Owned Businesses in the United States. MIT Press.
- ↵Feliciano, Cynthia. 2006. “Beyond the Family: The Influence of Premigration Group Status on the Educational Expectations of Immigrants’ Children.” Sociology of Education 79(4): 281–303.
- ↵Foner, Nancy, and Joanna Dreby. 2011. “Relations Between the Generations in Immigrant Families.” Annual Review of Sociology 37: 545–64.
- ↵Glaser, Barney, and Ansel Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Sociology Press.
- ↵Gold, Steven J. 2016. “A Critical Race Theory Approach to Black American Entrepreneurship.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(9): 1697–1718.
- ↵Goldscheider, Calvin, and Frances E. Kobrin. 1980. “Ethnic Continuity and the Process of Self-Employment.” Ethnicity 7(3): 256–78.
- ↵Greene, Margaret, and Jeanne Batalova. 2025. “Chinese Immigrants in the United States.” Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.
- ↵Huang, Tiffany J. 2021. “Negotiating the Workplace: Second-Generation Asian American Professionals’ Early Experiences.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 47(11): 2477–96.
- ↵Ip, Barry, and Gabriel Jacobs. 2006. “Business Succession Planning: A Review of the Evidence.” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 13(3): 326–50.
- ↵Jiménez, Tomás R., and Horowitz, Adam. L. 2013. “When White Is Just Alright: How Immigrants Redefine Achievement and Reconfigure the Ethnoracial Hierarchy.” American Sociological Review 78(5): 849–71.
- ↵Kao, Grace, and Marta Tienda. 1995. “Optimism and Achievement: The Educational Performance of Immigrant Youth.” Social Science Quarterly 76(1): 1–19.
- ↵Kasinitz, Philip, Mary C. Waters, John H. Mollenkopf, and Jennifer Holdaway. 2009. Inheriting the City: The Children of Immigrants Come of Age. Russell Sage Foundation.
- ↵Keister, Lisa A. 2000. Wealth in America: Trends in Wealth Inequality. Cambridge University Press.
- ↵Keister, Lisa A. 2005. Getting Rich: America’s New Rich and How They Got That Way. Cambridge University Press.
- ↵Keister, Lisa A. 2014. “The One Percent.” Annual Review of Sociology 40: 347–67.
- ↵Keister, Lisa A., Jody Agius Vallejo, and Brian Aronson. 2016. “Chinese Immigrant Worth: Heterogeneity in Adaptation.” PLOS One 11(12): e0168043.
- ↵Keister, Lisa A., Mingxian Li, and Hand Young Lee. 2021. “Do You Need Business Assets to Be Rich?” Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World 7: 1–3.
- ↵Kibria, Nazli. 2000. “Race, Ethnic Options, and Ethnic Binds: Identity Negotiations of Second-Generation Chinese and Korean Americans.” Sociological Perspectives 43(1): 77–95.
- ↵Kim, Dae Young. 2006. “Stepping-Stone to Intergenerational Mobility? The Springboard, Safety Net, or Mobility Trap Functions of Korean Immigrant Entrepreneurship for the Second Generation.” International Migration Review 40(4): 927–62.
- ↵Kim, ChangHwan, and Yang Zhao. 2014. “Are Asian American Women Advantaged? Labor Market Performance of College Educated Female Workers.” Social Forces 93(2): 623–52.
- ↵Kim, Nadia Y. 2007. “Critical Thoughts on Asian American Assimilation in the Whitening Literature.” Social Forces 86(2): 561–74.
- ↵Kloosterman, Robert, and Jan Rath. 2003. Immigrant Entrepreneurs: Venturing Abroad in the Age of Globalization. Berg.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer. 2002. Civility in the City: Blacks, Jews, and Koreans in Urban America. Harvard University Press.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer, Kimberly Goyette, Xi Song, and Yu Xie. 2024. “Presumed Competent: The Strategic Adaptation of Asian Americans in Education and the Labor Market.” Annual Review of Sociology 50: 455–74.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer, and Dian Sheng. 2024. “The Asian American Assimilation Paradox.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 50(1): 68–94.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer, and Min Zhou. 2014. “The Success Frame and Achievement Paradox: The Costs and Consequences for Asian Americans.” Race and Social Problems 6: 38–55.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer, and Min Zhou. 2015. The Asian American Achievement Paradox. Russell Sage Foundation.
- ↵Lee, Jennifer C., and Samuel Kye. 2016. “Racialized Assimilation of Asian Americans.” Annual Review of Sociology 42: 253–73.
- ↵Li, Wei. 1998. “Anatomy of a New Ethnic Settlement: The Chinese Ethnoburb in Los Angeles.” Urban Studies 35(3): 479–501.
- ↵Light, Ivan, and Edna Bonacich. 1988. Immigrant Entrepreneurs: Koreans in Los Angeles, 1965–1982. University of California Press.
- ↵Longenecker, Justin G., and Joseph Schoen. 1978. “Management Succession in the Family Business.” Journal of Small Business Management 16(3): 1–6.
- ↵Louie, Vivian. 2004. Compelled to Excel: Immigration, Education, and Opportunity Among Chinese Americans. Stanford University Press.
- ↵Louie, Vivian S. 2006. “Growing Up Ethnic in Transnational Worlds: Identities among Second-Generation Chinese and Dominicans.” Identities 13(3): 363–94.
- ↵Lu, Jackson G. 2022. “A Social Network Perspective on the Bamboo Ceiling: Ethnic Homophily Explains Why East Asians but Not South Asians Are Underrepresented in Leadership in Multiethnic Environments.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 122(6): 959–82.
- ↵Lu, Jackson G. 2024. “A Creativity Stereotype Perspective on the Bamboo Ceiling: Low Perceived Creativity Explains the Underrepresentation of East Asian Leaders in the United States.” Journal of Applied Psychology 109(2): 238–56.
- ↵McCall, George J., and J. L. Simmons. 1969. Identities and Interactions: An Examination of Human Associations in Everyday Life. Free Press.
- ↵Min, Pyong Gap. 2008. Ethnic Solidarity for Economic Survival: Korean Greengrocers in New York City. Russell Sage Foundation.
- ↵Ong, Aihwa. 1999. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality. Duke University Press.
- ↵Park, Lisa Sun-Hee. 2005. Consuming Citizenship: Children of Asian Immigrant Entrepreneurs. Stanford University Press.
- ↵Portes, Alejandro. 1987. “The Social Origins of the Cuban Enclave Economy in Miami.” Sociological Perspectives 30(4): 340–72.
- ↵Portes, Alejandro, and Robert L. Bach. 1985. Latin Journey: Cuban and Mexican Immigrants in the United States. University of California Press.
- ↵Portes, Alejandro, and Julia Sensenbrenner. 1993. “Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on the Social Determinants of Economic Action.” American Journal of Sociology 98(6): 1320–50.
- ↵Portes, Alejandro, and Steven Shafer. 2007. “Revisiting the Enclave Hypothesis: Miami Twenty-Five Years Later.” In The Sociology of Entrepreneurship, edited by Martin Ruef and Michael Lounsbury. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, vol. 25. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
- ↵Portes, Alejandro, and Min Zhou. 1992. “Gaining the Upper Hand: Economic Mobility Among Immigrant and Domestic Minorities.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 15(4): 491–522.
- ↵Raijman, Rebeca, and Marta Tienda. 2000. “Immigrants’ Pathways to Business Ownership: A Comparative Ethnic Perspective.” International Migration Review 34(3): 682–706.
- ↵Romero, Mary, and Zulema Valdez. 2016. “Introduction to the Special Issue: Intersectionality and Entrepreneurship.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(9): 1553–65.
- ↵Rosenbloom, Raquel, and Jeanne Batalova. 2023. “Chinese Immigrants in the United States.” Migration Information Source. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.
- ↵Ruiz, Neil G., Luis Noé-Bustamante, and Sono Shah. 2023. “Appendix: Demographic Profile of Asian American Adults.” Pew Research Center. May 8.
- ↵Sakamoto, Arthur, Kimberly A. Goyette, and ChangHwan Kim. 2009. “Socioeconomic Attainments of Asian Americans.” Annual Review of Sociology 35: 255–76.
- ↵Sanchirico, Andrew. 1991. “The Importance of Small-Business Ownership in Chinese American Educational Achievement.” Sociology of Education 64(4): 293–304.
- ↵Saxenian, AnnaLee. 2002. “Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant High-Growth Entrepreneurs.” Economic Development Quarterly 16(1): 20–31.
- ↵Smith, Kelly, and Martin Beasley. 2011. “Graduate Entrepreneurs: Intentions, Barriers and Solutions.” Education + Training 53(8–9): 722–40.
- ↵Song, Miri. 1997. “Children’s Labour in Ethnic family Businesses: The Case of Chinese Take-Away Businesses in Britain.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 20(4): 690–716.
- ↵Steinberg, Laurence, Sanford M. Dornbusch, and B. Bradford Brown. 1992. “Ethnic Differences in Adolescent Achievement: An Ecological Perspective. American Psychologist 47(6): 723–29.
- ↵Tran, Van C., Jennifer Lee, and Tiffany J. Huang. 2019. “Revisiting the Asian Second-Generation Advantage.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 42(13): 2248–69.
- ↵Tran, Van C., Jennifer Lee, Oshin Khachikian, and Jess Lee. 2018. “Hyper-Selectivity, Racial Mobility, and the Remaking of Race.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(5): 188–209. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2018.4.5.09.
- ↵Tuan, Mia. 1999. Forever Foreigners or Honorary Whites? The Asian Ethnic Experience Today. Rutgers University Press.
- ↵Valdez, Zulema. 2011. The New Entrepreneurs: How Race, Class, and Gender Shape American Enterprise. Stanford University Press.
- ↵Waldinger, Roger, Howard E. Aldrich, and Robin Ward. 1990. Ethnic Entrepreneurs: Immigrant Business in Industrial Societies. Sage.
- ↵Wong, Bernard, Becky S. McReynolds, and Wynnie Wong. 1992. “Chinese Family Firms in the San Francisco Bay Area.” Family Business Review 5(4): 355–72.
- ↵Xie, Yu, and Kimberly Goyette. 2003. “Social Mobility and the Educational Choices of Asian Americans.” Social Science Research 32(3): 467–98.
- ↵Xie, Yu, and Kimberly Goyette. 2012. “Educational Expectations of Asian American Youth: Determinants and Ethnic Differences.” Sociology of Education 85(4): 333–52.
- ↵Zhou, Min. 1992. Chinatown: The Socioeconomic Potential of an Urban Enclave. Temple University Press.
- ↵Zhou, Min. 2009. Contemporary Chinese America: Immigration, Ethnicity, and Community Transformation. Temple University Press.
- ↵Zhou, Min. 2021. “Family, Gender, Ethnicity, and Pragmatism in Contemporary Diasporic Chinese Entrepreneurship: An Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Chinese Overseas 17(2): 225–38.
- ↵Zhou, Min, and Jennifer Lee. 2017. “Hyper-Selectivity and the Remaking of Culture: Understanding the Asian American Achievement Paradox.” Asian American Journal of Psychology 8(1): 7–15.
- ↵Zhou, Min, and Hong Liu. 2015. “Transnational Entrepreneurship and Immigrant Integration: New Chinese Immigrants in Singapore and the United States.” In Immigration and Work, edited by Jody Agius Vallejo, vol. 27 of Research in the Sociology of Work. Emerald.
- ↵Zhou, Min, and Hong Liu. 2017. “Immigrant Entrepreneurship and Diasporic Development: The Case of New Chinese Migrants in the USA.” In Contemporary Chinese Diasporas, edited by Min Zhou. Palgrave Macmillan.
- ↵Zhou, Yu, and Yen-Fen Tseng. 2001. “Regrounding the ‘Ungrounded Empires’: Localization as the Geographical Catalyst for Transnationalism.” Global Networks 1(2): 131–53.






